UN high court finds US seizure of Iranian assets violated treaty + More

In 2016, the U.S. Supreme Court ordered nearly $2 billion in assets of Iran’s state bank, frozen in the U.S., to be paid as compensation to relatives of victims of attacks linked to Iran.

UN high court finds US seizure of Iranian assets violated treaty

Related:

International Court of Justice orders US to compensate Iran for frozen assets

ICJ judgments are legally binding, however, the court has no means of enforcing them. Previously, both the US and Iran have ignored the court’s judgments.

US Hails ICJ Ruling On Iran Assets As ‘Major Victory’

“The court’s decision today rejected the vast majority of Iran’s case, including notably Iran’s claims on behalf of Bank Markazi,” said acting legal adviser Rich Visek of the US State Department.

[2002] U.S. Announces Intent Not to Ratify International Criminal Court Treaty

U.S. Announces Intent Not to Ratify International Criminal Court Treaty

On May 6, 2002, the Bush Administration announced that the United States does not intend to become a party to the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court. John Bolton, the Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, sent a letter to Kofi Annan, the Secretary-General of the United Nations, stating that “the United States does not intend to become a party to the treaty,” and that, “[a]ccordingly, the United States has no legal obligations arising from its signature on December 31, 2000.” [1]

While the policy merits of the Bush Administration’s announcement are of course open to debate, the announcement appears to be consistent with international law. There is nothing in international law that obligates a signatory to a treaty to become a party to the treaty, [6] and the Rome Statute itself (in Article 125) states that it is “subject to ratification, acceptance or approval by signatory States.” In addition, Article 18 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties provides that, upon signing a treaty, a nation is “obliged to refrain from acts which would defeat the object and purpose” of the treaty “until it shall have made its intention clear not to become a party to the treaty.” The Vienna Convention thus contemplates that nations may announce an intent not to ratify a treaty after signing it.

Related:

International Criminal Court: Letter to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan

Secretary Rumsfeld Statement On The ICC Treaty

American Foreign Policy and the International Criminal Court

President Clinton Statement on Signature of the International Criminal Court Treaty

Modern Treaty Law and Practice: Third Edition (PDF)

International law : cases and materials